Skip to main content

About your Search

20121007
20121015
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5
. obama would like to have spending end up at 23%. romney and ryan both want it down at 20%. so there's a clear difference, and they all agree on where it should go. what gets interesting is as you dig into the detail of what gets cut, and you'll see some very, i think, fascinating differences among these guys. so on social security, as you heard president obama say in the last debate, the three guys are actually in the same place. they want to spend the same amount on social security in the next ten years. when you get to medicare, romney and ryan are in the same place, but romney actually a as you also heard him say, wants to repeal the $716 billion. it's actually $900 billion of cuts. he would spend more on medicare than ryan or obama. and then you have obamacare. >> let me ask you really quickly. if anybody has heard, let me know. has mitt romney said what he wants to do with the $716 billion? >> essentially it would be used to get his spending down to that 20% level because you're going to see in a minute, he has a bunch of other places he wants to spend money. >> spend the $716
. mitt romney and barack obama both supported, in the heat, in the flash of the financial crisis stepping in and backstopping the banks. what mitt romney took issue are are certain provisions within dodd-frank that actually institutionalized too big to fail. they actually declare certainly financial institutions as systemically important financial institutions, meaning if they get into trouble again, the taxpayers are on the hook. that's the financial plan that barack obama supports, and that's the one that mitt romney took issue to. and when romney said that to him on the stage, how does this help our economy that the federal government now has this implicit guarantee to support the banks? the president had no answer. he said mitt romney just wants to let wall street run wild. that's not what he said. he supports responsible regulation. again, the president didn't have a response. >> so we have vice presidential debate coming up. our good friend, paul ryan, is going to be debating against our other good friend, joe biden. >> joe biden is the best. >> we're just saying what a great americ
of romney in iowa and ohio in particular. they've got to rest one, probably both of those states away from barack obama. >> for all the swing states and those of you don't wake up with a map staring at you like chuck todd and myself, this is assuming mitt romney wins, florida, north carolina, virginia, colorado and nevada. a lot of swing states. he has to win two out of three out of ohio, wisconsin, iowa. i don't think he's going to win wisconsin. >> he has to win one of them. if he swept all those others he just had to win one. >> romney would? >> yes. >> if romney wins ohio, he's still -- >> he gets there. or he win iowa. he just has to win one of these midwestern states. >> which one is the best target for him? >> i think it's -- organizationally, i would say it's ohio. i don't know. i think both ohio and iowa are hard. >> mike i agree with you. i'm thinking iowa. >> i think there are huge organizational holes that romney dug for himself in both of those states. >> chuck, it's donny. you talked a lot and i found this fascinating about kind of enthusiasm gap as far as that energizing. i
by on your side is the fact that both governor romney and congressman ryan say we are not going to make any cuts in the defense budget. it is the largest single piece of the federal budget, and i don't know any chief petty officer or master sergeant for that matter who wouldn't say, look, there are some ways to find some savings here without diminishing in any way our capacity to protect the national security of the united states. is it completely off the table? and if it is, how do you ever get to the deficit reduction that you need to without making some of the trims and making it more efficient? >> no, tom, it's never been completely off the table, and it's just not an accurate statement. we have always said that everything should be on the table. and i, for one, would never say you can defend every dollar and cent being spent at the pentagon. but what we do know right now is the question before us is is looming sequester. and that has serious implications so far as our ability as americans to be seeming a global power because if that sequester hits, i don't think there's any question th
-- it was every candidate on stage showed how she was taking all sides, both sides of that issue, not actually, at the time, candidate obama. >> richard haass. >> one other thing about the speech where i thought governor romney broke ground was on syria. critical of the obama administration of doing essentially very little, more than 20,000 syrians have lost their lives and he's specifically talking about upping the army of the opposition and giving them one way or the other. sort of stuff they need of the shoot down syrian planes or tanks. this would be a major step forward and basically say we're not going to get involved ourselves, but no-fly zone or lesser american boots on the ground. but if mitt romney had his way, we would lean much more forward toward arming the syrian opposition. once you give arms, you lose control, who knows whose handses they end up in. >> and by the way, as we said when we were talking about benghazi, talking about libya six months ago, who was the opposition? >> on the other hand, there was something morally wrong. a lot of people would say not getting involved y
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5